Ought the actions of corporations be held to the same moral standards as the actions of individuals???

Question

Why or why not?

thanks for any answer
details are awesome =)

Answer 1

Completely. I worked at a Fortune 100 company that is considered honest and I saw some scummy stuff going on.

Answer 2

Absolutely. First, they petitioned the courts to be accorded the status of a "person" in most contexts, and thus the price of that is to be held to the same standards. Further, given their size, they can do greater harm to a larger number of people than almost any individual (e.g., Enron for starters). However, a corporation, while legally an entity, is nothing more than the actions of individual managers and employees and the boards of directors. Those individuals must first be held to the same standards as people outside the corporate context and then the corporation to the same standards (but be specific about which standard: I assume you mean honesty and things of that nature). People cheat on their taxes, cheat the government out of very little money relatively speaking, and pay fines or go to prison. Corporations have more elusive accounting standards, but serious cheating has a huge economic impact.

Answer 3

LD?
... some basic ideas
AFF: This position is, I believe, the hardest to uphold/defend in this resolution, however, there are several things you can do:
1) Say that both corp.s and individuals should be held to no, that's right, ZERO, standards
2) say that corp.s are made up of individuals
~this will be a REALLY common arguement, but you can mold it really well and if you research and defend it well in the rebuttals, it's a pretty decent arguement

NEG: Oh boy, here come the kritiks!
1) say how moral standards don't exist... or that every1's moral standards are different
2) say how corp.s are amoral... that is, how they aren't moral actors... just research "agency" or "autonomy"... etc.
3) the neg has a great and broad burden on this topic... while the aff has to defend "same moral standards", the neg can defend "more, less, or simply different"

hope that helped...

Answer 4

I thoroughly agree that companies should be held to the same moral criteria as persons. shall we take the corporate verify for instance. Say I wrote a verify to a seller, signed it and extra it in change for products. shouldn't that money be accessible interior the business company on the time the verify replaced into extra? after all I did receive products for my checking draft. someone who signs and indications the corporate verify most of the time and in maximum STATES, won't be able to be held criminally to blame for the verify of it comes decrease back as inadequate money. the seller that received the undesirable verify is out of things and amenities, good? Why shouldn't they be entitled to gathering on the verify as they could with someone? after all the seller did receive a fraudulent verify. that's basically one get at the same time and that i have many many extra. Take Care